If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

So instead of defending your own stupidity, you go for patronizing overbearing outrage.
Typical Nalano. It's a shame you have absolutely nothing better to do than shit up every single thread with your combination of 'random posts with nonsensical anecdotes' and 'faux pretentious look how smart, artiste and elite I am'.

Oh my god, get in fucking line if you wanna kiss my ass.

Originally Posted by Farcelet

Got to say, after - what is it, fifteen years of online gaming? I'm still leaning that way. What virtue does lag prediction hold when high speed connections are virtually everywhere?

It's the difference between a great experience for a few and a pretty good experience for everybody.

I miss the halcyon days of LAN parties, too, but hell, I don't even have time for LAN parties anymore.

NalanoH. Wildmoon
Director of the Friends of Nalano PAC
Attorney at Lawl
"His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." - Woody Allen

There is no audience nowadays for a casual cs, nor is there a point. Cod players will stick to cod, and cs players won't touch a game that misses core cs features with a ten foot pole.
As steam stats show the cs: GO playerbase is collapsing fast (already back down to a third of the peak players compared to 1.6)

CS players have already gone back to cs and css , as numbers for both are back to exactly what they were at before GO was released.

That's contradictory. If all the CS players have gone back to CS and CSS (because numbers for those are back to pre-GO levels) then the people left playing CS:GO are entirely new players, the 'audience for a casual cs' that you say doesn't exist. Sure that audience may be a third of the size of the 1.6 audience, but it's still significant. And still more than a lot of games.

It's the difference between a great experience for a few and a pretty good experience for everybody.

I miss the halcyon days of LAN parties, too, but hell, I don't even have time for LAN parties anymore.

Can't say I agree with 'few' here, in my experience most pings hover between 40 - 50ms, modems are a thing of the past and there usually ARE enough servers worldwide to suit most people's purposes, unless we're talking about obscure or old games still played by a minuscule bunch of hardcore fans - but then, those that come to mind don't employ lag compensation to begin with (Marathon, Counter-Strike beta 5.2 and 6.1 incidentally).

Maybe I'm wrong, but I just can't help feeling that for the sake of a dramatically small proportion of the player base we're giving away the crispness of the experience - hell, maybe this is the reason people are so ragey in games nowdays? It's much easier to call 'bullshit' on the things we see when they don't correspond with reality, you know?

What's worse? Seeing your gun fire a round into the head of some bloke only for the hit never to register because your lower-ping-opponent uploaded his status first, or suffering a slight - but real - delay?

Can't say I agree with 'few' here, in my experience most pings hover between 40 - 50ms, modems are a thing of the past and there usually ARE enough servers worldwide to suit most people's purposes, unless we're talking about obscure or old games still played by a minuscule bunch of hardcore fans - but then, those that come to mind don't employ lag compensation to begin with (Marathon, Counter-Strike beta 5.2 and 6.1 incidentally).

Maybe I'm wrong, but I just can't help feeling that for the sake of a dramatically small proportion of the player base we're giving away the crispness of the experience - hell, maybe this is the reason people are so ragey in games nowdays? It's much easier to call 'bullshit' on the things we see when they don't correspond with reality, you know?

What's worse? Seeing your gun fire a round into the head of some bloke only for the hit never to register because your lower-ping-opponent uploaded his status first, or suffering a slight - but real - delay?

Everybody always assumes they speak for the silent majority. You argue against my "few" and yet insist on your dramatically small proportion​.

NalanoH. Wildmoon
Director of the Friends of Nalano PAC
Attorney at Lawl
"His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." - Woody Allen

Everybody always assumes they speak for the silent majority. You argue against my "few" and yet insist on your dramatically small proportion​.

That's right.

In your experience what's the proportion of players with sub-50ms pings to those that linger over 100? Having played nothing but Mount & Blade Warband since I gave up on online gaming a decade ago I wouldn't know how things play out elsewhere but twenty to one is roughly my experience, surely if this is the case in the rest of the world we can accept that the term "few" isn't accurate, though "dramatically small proportion" might be a bit extreme.

However I was residing in Europe at the time and you're from the US. Maybe things are different?

In your experience what's the proportion of players with sub-50ms pings to those that linger over 100?

Before the more modern versions of netcodes (where everything for me seems to hover around 90ms), I'd have to pick and choose hosts by city. That means I'd play against players mostly on server farms situated in DC or NYC, and sometimes from Chicago. By contrast, I'd have a relatively hard time playing against folks in the tech centers of Austin or San Fran or San Diego.

America's a big place. Europe, on the other hand,

NalanoH. Wildmoon
Director of the Friends of Nalano PAC
Attorney at Lawl
"His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." - Woody Allen

Before the more modern versions of netcodes (where everything for me seems to hover around 90ms), I'd have to pick and choose hosts by city. That means I'd play against players mostly on server farms situated in DC or NYC, and sometimes from Chicago. By contrast, I'd have a relatively hard time playing against folks in the tech centers of Austin or San Fran or San Diego.

Before the more modern versions of netcodes (where everything for me seems to hover around 90ms), I'd have to pick and choose hosts by city. That means I'd play against players mostly on server farms situated in DC or NYC, and sometimes from Chicago. By contrast, I'd have a relatively hard time playing against folks in the tech centers of Austin or San Fran or San Diego.

America's a big place. Europe, on the other hand,

Not even remotely accurate comparison for a start, Europe doesn't stop at Germany. And the map projection isn't one that preserves area. In fact Europe covers significantly more area than the US.

Grew up playing CS from Alaska...yah GL playing on anything past the west coast. They have more underwater pipe now but the distance is still a huge factor. The days you would just LAN. With broadband we have its so much more convenient to just play online for a night.

I think I get 150-200ms playing on EU servers. Starcraft works fine, not quite the same as playing a FPS. Taiwan server is hit or miss.

Those figures don't match up well with your map, son. They do match up decently with the figures I was able to find though. A glance at my globe also suggests that the US and Europe should be of similar sizes unless you include a third of more of Russia in which case Europe is naturally larger. It's hard to find good figures on how big Europe is because it's hard to find a reasonable definition of what Europe is.

I think of [the Internet] as a grisly raw steak laid out on a porcelain benchtop in the sun, covered in chocolate hazelnut sauce. In the background plays Stardustís Music Sounds Better With You. Thereís lots of fog. --tomeoftom

People seem to keep forgetting broadband isn't even as widespread as you'd probably expect it to be in the U.S.

It costs upwards of $50 a month to get decent speeds. And where I live there are a grand total of two companies who offer it. Two.

Our communications network is FUBAR. Europeans have long surpassed us in this area and we're not even trying to catch up.

Two isn't all that bad. There are neighborhoods near where I live that don't have a choice. I'm sure there are larger communities in more rural areas that don't have any choice, either. Yay for communications monopolies and price gouging!

Is Europe better though? I don't know much about the cable networks of Europe. I would be surprised if European telecommunications networks were substantially better or cheaper in a way that wasn't roughly proportional to their increased population density. More people in a small area means more people served by similar amounts of laid cable. The US isn't very dense.

I think of [the Internet] as a grisly raw steak laid out on a porcelain benchtop in the sun, covered in chocolate hazelnut sauce. In the background plays Stardustís Music Sounds Better With You. Thereís lots of fog. --tomeoftom

There are all of three half-decent overlay maps on Google image search, and that one names cities.

Doesn't make it accurate.

I think of [the Internet] as a grisly raw steak laid out on a porcelain benchtop in the sun, covered in chocolate hazelnut sauce. In the background plays Stardustís Music Sounds Better With You. Thereís lots of fog. --tomeoftom